Pilafhead - now that you mentioned it - I remember reading, a while ago, something about Julian Cope and his work on prehistoric archaeology in Britain. I think he was a guitarist with a 70s rock group.

quote:Originally posted by Thorny Rose:Erm, Steve, I still reserve the right to disagree about calling the plan, "cross-shaped"... LOL!
Don't worry, I won't tell anyone who you are...

I had thought you knew - but when I saw you didn't, I just thought I'd leave it that way for the moment!

The church description was from memory (I do not thınk it has ever been surveyed) so may not be all correct! It is really a very hybrid design, I wonder if the side arms may have been for a choir - or perhaps for richer females who did not want to mix wıth the unwashed up in the gallery.

congratulations on your site "virtualani". i have a few comments to make:

1. the "restoration" could not be insulted enough, that is clear. but i would not be so sure that it was a deliberate attempt to obliterate armenian history from turkey. look at how they "restored" some ottoman and seljuk monuments, not to mention classical greek and roman ones (out of which we make money) and you will see what i mean.

2. the turks are not the only ones to blame for such "restoration" in turkey. about a decade ago there was a french archaeologist who had come to investigate the ruins of yazılıkaya near the hittite capital hattuşaş in boğazköy. she covered the reliefs with latex, which, on being peeled off, removed the millenia-old patina with it. now these reliefs are exposed to weathering, it is doubtful they will survive yet another century. what a crime!

3. can something be done to save what is left of ani from further damage? there is an initiative by turkish archaeologists called tay (türkiye arkeolojik yerleşmeleri). i think if anything can be done in turkey, they are the ones who can do it. if you are not familiar with them, let me know and i will send you their details.

i think we have to be 1) tacit 2) silent 3) quick and 4) efficient in our approach to save anything. as we say in turkish, "our aim is to eat grapes, not beat the gardener".

As for Selin and her question about what happens at Ani...by Thorny Rose... it was my uncle who mentioned this to me: http://www.virtualan...istorysigns.jpg"No mention of Armenians," he had said. Is that a major crime? Perhaps not in practice. But aren't we all angered when others try to sell off aspects of Turkish culture as strictly their own? http://www.virtualan...y3/history3.htm

Of course, such neglect is nothing surprising in our country... We do it to our "own" monuments. Monuments that will not attract tourists are not even listed - there is one such wall and arch in the village of Şerefiye of Kayseri - check it out if you go there. Şerefiye is a village where Circassians are dominant - the stones of the Roman(?) ruin were used in houses and other things until the folks grew out of their ignorance, sort of...I may not completely understand the hysteria over the restorations as seen in the middle of the page - I have seen similar restorations in Rome where the new material stands out against the old, looking ridiculous in a way. But what is shown at the bottom leaves me utterly dumb... And the excavators... Come on. I can't blame others for thinking such crudeness is on purpose. And the sign... Is it coincidence that Armenians are not mentioned in Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi (Museum of Anatolian Civilizations)? (I have not gone there but I know those who have - including, again, my uncle.)

1) re restoration work: now restoration has always been a very delicate issue in archaeology for the following reasons:

i) very rarely do we have enough hard facts (=measurements etc) to carry out an accurate restoration.

ii) you cannot stop the destructive effects of time, only delay them. so every piece of restoration work is inevitably doomed.

iii) you MUST make the restored parts of any monument look different from the rest, otherwise the restored parts might be mistaken for the original. and you never know for sure that you have restored things accurately.

things are doubly more complicated with monuments/artifacts from the distant past that had been restored - sometimes more than once - in the past. according to what are you going to re-restore them in the 21th century? according to the original originals or previously restored originals? this is a particularly daunting issue if the restoration itself is accepted to have historical/artistical value.

iv) materials: you learn the effects of these by trial and error, unfortunately. as materials get older, they get more prone to destruction, and this includes stonework. note that the new material used in restoration work was also stone, probably of the same type and even from the same location! but the simple fact that one was cut a thousand years ago and the other just a few years ago makes an enormous difference in terms of patina, surface, porosity etc. unfortunately in every restoration work a new mistake is made and a new lesson learnt. frankly, i think that most of the stuff is best left alone under the ground until we find better ways to conserve them. i knew the late kenan erim, archaeologist who dug out aphrodisias in western turkey, he had once got out a perfectly prserved marble statue of a horse which then cracked in the museum because of humidity! (the museum was built by some nouveau riche to show off in a cultured manner and evade tax, so kenan bey's advice on what to pay attention to was completely unheeded, hence the result).

2) re absence of armenians from turkish sources on anatolian history: many historians would put them with the name, but remember (maybe you dont, you were at primary school then) that an issue of the National Geographic or Times Atlas of World History was collected because a map of antiquity referred to eastern anatolia as "armenia"? people are only now beginning to break free.

havea look at my earlier posting and think if there is anything that can be done about ani.

1) re restoration work: now restoration has always been a very delicate issue in archaeology for the following reasons:

i) very rarely do we have enough hard facts (=measurements etc) to carry out an accurate restoration.

ii) you cannot stop the destructive effects of time, only delay them. so every piece of restoration work is inevitably doomed.

iii) you MUST make the restored parts of any monument look different from the rest, otherwise the restored parts might be mistaken for the original. and you never know for sure that you have restored things accurately.

I agree that the restored parts should look different - at least up close. Otherwise, it is just repair like the ancients would do, no?

quote:things are doubly more complicated with monuments/artifacts from the distant past that had been restored - sometimes more than once - in the past. according to what are you going to re-restore them in the 21th century? according to the original originals or previously restored originals? this is a particularly daunting issue if the restoration itself is accepted to have historical/artistical value.

iv) materials: you learn the effects of these by trial and error, unfortunately. as materials get older, they get more prone to destruction, and this includes stonework. note that the new material used in restoration work was also stone, probably of the same type and even from the same location! but the simple fact that one was cut a thousand years ago and the other just a few years ago makes an enormous difference in terms of patina, surface, porosity etc. unfortunately in every restoration work a new mistake is made and a new lesson learnt. frankly, i think that most of the stuff is best left alone under the ground until we find better ways to conserve them. i knew the late kenan erim, archaeologist who dug out aphrodisias in western turkey, he had once got out a perfectly prserved marble statue of a horse which then cracked in the museum because of humidity! (the museum was built by some nouveau riche to show off in a cultured manner and evade tax, so kenan bey's advice on what to pay attention to was completely unheeded, hence the result).

I know about neglect. I saw the remains of a donkey (they don't know how old it is) that was taken out of a salt mine in Çankırı. It had been preserved perfectly. The guy there told us that he had been one of the first to see it and it had looked almost alive - that well preserved! However, once they took it out to a museum and it was exposed to daylight, it started to decompose. I saw it half decayed, unfortunately. Same mentality, different setting.

quote:2) re absence of armenians from turkish sources on anatolian history: many historians would put them with the name, but remember (maybe you dont, you were at primary school then) that an issue of the National Geographic or Times Atlas of World History was collected because a map of antiquity referred to eastern anatolia as "armenia"? people are only now beginning to break free.

havea look at my earlier posting and think if there is anything that can be done about ani.

regards,

ali suat

I do not know what can be done about Ani. While Steve tells us of a quarry nearby across the border, we of course have to do our best. But what and how?
I think that perhaps we need a better team of archaeologists and what-not. Better supervision of work... So you don't have collapses despite the restoration or something. I haven't seen it myself and my exposure isn't all that much. I do not, however, think that trying to raise the issue to the public's conscience will help, if anyone has that on their minds, though this doesn't mean I think it is bound to be harmful. Then again, I might be wrong. After all, it is public opinion that counts and makes a difference.
I wonder about the funding, too.

Turkey's borders are recognized by international law. Armenia, too, is aware of the extent of Turkish sovereignty.
Close to Armenia as it may be, theoretically or practically, it is impossible to allocate any piece of land, especially during time of peace.
The quarry... Seeing to it is what is up to the Armenians, as it is on their turf. I also think that it is a problem of more immediate nature. I was surprised when I heard about it.
So, instead of fantasizing and knowing they are fantasizing, why don't these same people get a grip on more tangible and certainly more realistic aspects of the problem concerning the "salvage" of Ani? That is something I just got out of the top of my head. Isn't that a good idea, Paul?

It was not my intention to imply that the "restorations" HAVE the motive to destroy the buildings Armenian identity.

Maybe it is not clearly said, but I tried to say that the motive is probably just greed and crass stupidity. These are the same motives that have created the quarry on the Armenian side - and i wıll be devoting a whole page to that disgrace in the near future! i also mention the disasterous "restoration" of the palace at Dogubayazit as an example that these sorts of restorations in Turkey are not unique to Ani.

TAY? i thought that is just for pre-classical stuff. Am i wrong?

I also have heard that story of the French woman missusing the latex, but i suspect the story may have got exagerated a bit over the years

As for the future - i just don't think anything good will ever happen to Ani. And ıt is no longer all Turkey's fault. The cathedral is probably only a year or two away from collapse due to the blastıng from the Armenian quarry.

As for the practıce of "restoration". I am sorry to say that ıt looks like Turkey is about 100 years behind the rest of the world regarding architectural preservation. The only word now to use with "restoration" ıs "NEVER"!

Sorry, Ali, but to say a thing like "you MUST make the restored parts of any monument look different from the rest, otherwise the restored parts might be mistaken for the original. and you never know for sure that you have restored things accurately" is obsolete and outdated. Modern preservation seeks not to "restore" but to "consolidate to preserve" - which involves adding as little new work as you can. If you want to "restore" a buildıng, you do it using a computer simulation.

About maps with Armenia on them - have you heard the story about the recent problem that Bilkent university found itself in?

They are based in Ankara - it ıs not clear whether they are responsible for the "restorations" so far, or are there now to pick up the pieces and salvage the situation a bit. Perhaps you could visit them!

Thanks, Steve.
Where are you right now?
I learned that I have Sundays off... If all goes well, maybe we might meet up again.
As for the haphazard way restoration is carried out here, it is true that it is not unique to Ani.
So sad...

i can agree with you that what i said re restoration is obsolete & outdated. it may be because i have been in touch with many archaeologists from different schools (ecoles) and generations, and they never seem to agree on anything. i also have been away from academis for almost a decade now, and follow the latest developments with some delay. i agree that one should touch a monument as little as possible.

i know turkey is a century behind the rest of the world in restoration, and it is not the only area where it is in this state.

i also think tay is (or was) just preclassical, but i cannot conceive they would be insensitive to the plight of ani.

of course the worst thing at the moment is the quarry. i dont want to sound like a conspiracy theoretician, but what on earth would armenia operate a quarry for just a mile from ani other than to see it destroyed and pile the blame on the turks? (and what a waste if this is the case: turks are already doing quite a bit of that themselves, aren't they?)

i recall vaguely having heard of some trouble bilkent got into with some map, but don't really know the details. i am sorry to say this but i cannot feel sorry for them: bilkent was founded by doğramacı, who was also the head of yök, that academic police force (i couldn't get my oxford degree recognised by them for a bloody two years, and also taught at the university of istanbul for one year and had to wrap up my academic plans for the future). serves them right.

but of course, the fact that you get into trouble just because of a map is a tragedy.

quote:Originally posted by aurguplu:i am sorry to say this but i cannot feel sorry for them: bilkent was founded by doğramacı, who was also the head of yök, that academic police force (i couldn't get my oxford degree recognised by them for a bloody two years, and also taught at the university of istanbul for one year and had to wrap up my academic plans for the future). serves them right.

Sure does!
I don't want to sound like I am performing a "knee-jerk," but I think YÖK is needed, given the way we would rather keep out people who go to don't-know-what "university" in Egypt... Or would we rather not? It is a proven fact that as a people we have no auto-control/auto-check and hence we need the "shepherds"... But this incident you've gone through is plain ridiculous. Incidents such as these work against us, whether it is individuals or the country as a whole.
You see, it is because of fear of such, among a huge list of others, that I chose not to attend a university abroad. My father told me that I might have to risk settling abroad permanently, as he is aware of such himself... Yep.
I also had an art teacher here in high school whose husband had a friend who was the son of a former diplomat. The guy knows 11 languages (two more than the present pope) and has studied philology here so he wouldn't risk anything, but guess what he does for a living: he sells shirts.
Anyway, that was off topic.

having done my high school and university studies abroad, i think your parents are right. turkey is simply not a country where you can have a satisfying intellectual life, it looks like it has never been.

the only thing you can do in turkey is sell stuff, play in the stock exchange, or park money to repo (well that's kind of disappearing now). very few of my university-educated friends have a bookshelf (a separate piece of furniture for books and nothing else) at home, and even fewer of those regularly buy and read books once they are done with university.

if you want to live in turkey, better do your studies here and then perhaps do a master's degree or sth like that abroad. otherwise you'll have a very difficult time adjusting. this has been my experience and i have adjusted only by waving goodbye to many of the things i cherished.

sorry if this sounds a bit depressing but that's the way it is.

i would like to know more about that guy who speaks 11 languages and sells shirts now. i myself speak eight and sell stocks, so we have a lot in common!

Eight?? And what are they? <curious>
I don't know the guy myself. Remember, he was the friend of the husband of a teacher of mine ("tavşanın suyunun suyu")... And she had told us that he had said there was no life and no future for his son here and left for and settled in Italy.
I don't see how conducting a master's abroad will help me adjust... <scratch scratch head> Perhaps you meant, OK, be there, but do also go abroad for the experience instead of always being abroad? (Am I taking your time? LOL...)
Anyway... I gotta catch the bus. Later!